Time Will Surrender Reporter's Notes

Network News

X Profile
View More Activity
By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 1, 2005

Time magazine yielded to a court order yesterday and agreed to turn over documents that identify a confidential source, a rare move by a major news organization that Time said it hopes will keep one of its reporters out of jail.

The decision to turn over reporter Matthew Cooper's notes and e-mails -- over his objections -- represents a victory for special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald, who has pursued access to information about journalists' conversations with confidential sources as he investigates whether senior administration officials knowingly identified an undercover CIA operative to the media. It leaves the New York Times as the only news organization still insisting that its reporter would serve jail time rather than comply with an order by Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan to cooperate with prosecutors.

Time said in a statement yesterday that "the same Constitution that protects the freedom of the press requires obedience to final decisions of the courts and respect for their rulings and judgments. That Time Inc. strongly disagrees with the courts provides no immunity. . . . Our nation lives by the rule of law . . . none of us is above it."

The Cooper documents are primarily electronic notes and e-mails stored on Time's computers.

The decision spelled a kind of surrender to many reporters and editors. Courts have forced fewer than a dozen reporters or news organizations to turn over private notes in the past two decades, according to press advocacy organizations, and none could recall an instance of a news organization doing so against the wishes of its reporter.

But Time's editor in chief, concerned that the magazine should not consider itself above the law in an investigation that involves national security issues and grand jury proceedings, ultimately decided to cooperate with the probe.

"Matt believed he'd granted confidence to his sources and ought to protect that," Norman Pearlstine said in an interview. "I respect his position, but as editor in chief, I have an institutional view of how a journalism organization ought to behave" in a case such as this.

Cooper said he regrets Time's choice to give Fitzgerald his notes, which the magazine considers its property. "For almost two years, I've protected my confidential sources even under the threat of jail," Cooper said in an e-mail response to a question. "So while I understand Time's decision to turn over papers that identify my sources, I'm obviously disappointed."

The Times, whose reporter, Judith Miller, could be incarcerated as soon as Wednesday, also expressed regret. "We are deeply disappointed by Time Inc.'s decision to deliver the subpoenaed records," Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. said in a statement.

Fitzgerald's investigation began in January 2004, six months after the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame appeared in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak. It centers on whether Plame's identity was knowingly leaked in retaliation for criticism of the Bush administration's rationale for war in Iraq leveled by her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV.

On Wednesday, with appeals of Hogan's October order exhausted, the judge warned Cooper and Miller that they must answer Fitzgerald's questions or face jail. The Supreme Court had refused on Monday to hear their appeal.

Miller did some reporting for a story but never wrote an article. She has maintained she intends to go to jail rather than reveal her source -- though Fitzgerald has indicated in court filings that he already knows that official's identity. Cooper's lawyers have said in court that he is prepared to go to jail as well.


CONTINUED     1        >

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity